September 4, 2008

5:38 Central Time: Just setting up the post, so you'll know I'm going to do this again. Don't expect much for another 2 hours.

6:44: I just recorded a new Bloggingheads, with lots of talk about the convention. Now, I have the time to watch some things. Pawlenty is coming up in the next hour. Brownback. Hmmm.

7:07: Barack Obama gives a good speech, but the best sermons are lived, says Tim Pawlenty. He's trying to get the chant going: "John McCain put our country first." That was a little cheesy. Ah, but it didn't last long.

7:24: Brownback calls McCain "a history maker and a history breaker." That sounds like a line for the Steve Carrell character on "The Office."

8:01: Lindsey Graham says that everyone knows the surge is working. "The only people who deny it are Barack Obama and his buddies at MoveOn.org." Why? Because the Obama campaign is built on losing in Iraq, Graham says. McCain pushed for the surge, pushed against Republicans. It was unpopular. "Some said it was political suicide." John McCain "stopped the Democratic Party from losing this war." Strong stuff. Excellently delivered.

8:10: A little film about Sarah Palin. Co-maverick. "When Alaska's maverick joined America's maverick, the world shook." Some lovely pictures of people and landscapes. I especially enjoyed the shot of shelves of cut up fish meat to illustrate "hard work."

8:43: Cindy is speaking. She says we feel Abraham Lincoln's hand tapping us on the shoulder, then pauses, and it takes way too long for the crowd to pick up the applause cue. She makes a nice contrast -- a good liberal/conservative contrast -- between being concerned about what people in other countries will think and being concerned about what our forefathers would think.

9:04: Excellent film presentation of the story of John McCain. Most notable is the idea that he survived the Forrestal fire because there was a plan -- God isn't named outright -- for him to do something more. Nice but intimidating contributions from Mother McCain.

9:17: McCain's speech. It feels rote sometimes and has an actorly passion sometimes. "I hate war," woke me from one of my dozes. "I've never lived a day, in good times or bad, that I didn't thank God for the privilege.... I was blessed by misfortune." The speech felt very long and had its ups and downs. After many diverse phrases, he got it together over the idea of service and the slogan "Country First." He spoke clearly and well about his early life, as a cocky selfish man, and his transition to a man in love with his country. Now, I'm watching the final waving, with the family and Sarah Palin. Where are the balloons? I obsess over the balloons. What if they never fall? Obviously, there is a huge balloon snafu. Finally, balloons. Why were balloons important? Ah, why is a speech important? The big idea is John McCain's life, and somewhere along the way tonight that point was made. It was made over and over. It's now for us to decide if we want this man to lead us for the next 4 years.

420 comments:

The lines I wish were in John McCain’s acceptance speech, guaranteeing him the election:

“Our opponents claim to be worried about Governor Palin being able to assume the Presidency if I were to experience an early, unexpected demise. I certainly don’t expect that, nor does my mother. But in such an untimely event, there is no worry there, my friends.

The first phone call Vice President Palin would make would be to Defense Secretary Petraeus.

The second phone call would be to Secretary of State Liebermann.

The third phone call would be to Homeland Security Secretary Giulianni.

Uppity is a word that no one should use in association with African-Americans because of the historical baggage of the word.

Besides, the truly uppity people are these Republicans who think they can win the presidency when the mainstream media has already decreed that Obama will win. He is, after all, nearly on a par with vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin in terms of experience and credentials. Nearly.

So what that his policies will be radically leftist. So what that he wants to prosecute politicians criminally. So what that he wants to raise taxes absurdly. So what that he wants ginormous government programs that won't work. So what that his foreign policy will be a disaster for America and for the world.

UWS guy said... "Can't wait until the republicans call Obama's stance on more funding for the military as 'niggardly'"

There's a broad difference between using the term niggardly - which has a totally different meaning and etymology to that of the N word - and saying that a black man is "uppity." The former is fine - but even I think that the latter is the sort of thing that demands swift apologies or resignation.

By the way, before "SARAH!!!" is elected, she has to find a way to hunt down and skin John Huntsman alive. This is absolutely the worst nominating speech since Heydrich was nominated for Treasurer of the Nuremberg Chapter of Toastmasters.

This is damn painful. To think, there were movement conservatives who wanted this guy on McCain's short list.

section9 said... "I will not lift a finger to elect Sarah Palin in 2012 unless I get a commitment to the one appointment that must come before all others: ¶ ASSOCIATE JUSTICE ANN ALTHOUSE!!!!"

I think there's a lot more chance of that under McCain 44 than Palin 45, considering the likely makeup of the Senate in the next Congress. Althouse has said that she wouldn't like it - too constricting - but if she wanted it, and in terms of likely jurisprudence, I think she'd be terrific, except for on Roe-Casey, and that wouldn't stop me supporting her.

UWS guy said... "I think both parties would be better off with more pictures of the constitution on those big screens and less giant flags."

I think we'd all be better off if people in both parties would start by reading the Constitution - all of it. In recent years, the liberal Constitution has seemed to consist of the suspension clause, the religion clauses of the first amendment, an imagined "judicial oversight" clause, and amendments 3 through 27. The difficulty for liberals is that it's hard to put the Constitution up there on that screen when it's so totally incompatible with their party platform.

(My comment above shouldn't be read to imply that there aren't bits of the Constitution that conservatives prefer to ignore - the establishment clause is low-hanging fruit, of course, but the criminal process amendments in particular.)

He did the rounds of the morning talk shows, and I was very impressed with his poise, native humour and eloquence. He is a Presidential hopeful, one day.

Problem is, you know, not terribly exciting.

Having that, I'd like to apologise to Governor Lingle of Hawaii again, because I rode her boringness hard last night.

She was actually very effective, even with her maxim gun delivery.

It's unfair that people who are bad public speakers, but who are fantastic, capable people, are usually never chosen to lead a ticket, and if they are (like John McCain), people can't get past it and look at the substance.

Rudy did SUCH a great job last night (and few people mentioned it, which to his credit, he graciously didn't mind today), that his speech bumped the video on Palin's life scheduled to preceed her speech.

I thought that was a genius move, since the crowd were so pumped for Palin immediately. It also shows just how much the Republicans can wing something, and brazen it off successfully.

But will they release that bio vid, which supposedly was going to be narrated by Jon Voigt?

Of course, since Fred Thompson is an actor, and so is Voigt, the fact that his video was bumped prevents Democrats to whine about "celebrities".

But poor Jon Voigt. It can't be easy being a Republican, in Hollywood.

Solid, if vague words by Pawlenty. We need some substance. I'm a Republican, and I'm voting Republican, because I fundamentally agree with the economic and foreign policy principles of this party (Bush's intellectually lazy hijacking notwithstanding). But the Republicans need to speak to a wider audience. McCain needs to be less partisan and more specific on his vision for the presidency. Even if it's total BS, it needs to be there.

Victoria - I wouldn't suggest it for something regular, but as a special thing it might be nice. I honestly have no idea what I'm doing election night, but I think spending it with the folks here would be fun. Last time around, myself and a liberal friend sat in a bar and played drinking games.

I think it'd be fun and interesting, but I don't know that there's time to set it up tonight.

What's everyone doing for election night? If there's not going to be a string of Althouse meetups, a chat room would be very cool.

I don't know how hard it would be to set up. I was thinking of test driving it on my blog (one I never touch, but I'm trying to give it another shake as soon as I get really really motivated).

I'm actually planning on doing nothing on election night other than reading and watching the hysteria via the media and the blogosphere as McCain/Palin take the white house contrary to popular opinion. I'm still not a fan of McCain, but I'm certainly an enemy of Obama.

I think it's perfectly acceptable to run a video reminding us of the challenges and tragedies that some seem so eager to push into the past.

And yes, there hasn't been a terrorist attack since 9/11. I'm sorry, but that doesn't happen as a result of years of failed national security policies. It's not all attributable to the actions of the Bush administration. But to dismiss his actions as meaningless and counterproductive is idiotic.

I think both parties would be better off with more pictures of the constitution on those big screens and less giant flags.

Well, they were going to go with that plan. But the Democratic convention planners wanted to highlight the part that protects a right to abortion and the Republican convention planners wanted to highlight the part that says this is one nation under God. Convention time arrived and both groups were still stuck in the back room with a magnifying glass and a thesaurus, desperately scanning the Bill of Rights.

The point was: This is the starkest left vs. right election since, oh, 1900. Both McCain/Palin and Obama/Biden are candidates of their respective bases. Their only appeal to centrists like me is their winning personalities.

I like Palin. I was outraged at what the media and the Dems did to her. I'm glad she paid them back with an awesome speech. But still. She has tilted the Republican ticket very far to the right.

And Obama's acceptance speech removed the last vestige of his fading image as a candidate that will reach across party lines. He's saying we're not a good country if we don't go along with his big-government, high-taxes agenda. He's an idiot on the topic of Iraq, which means he's going to make big mistakes on foreign policy. He's too far to the left.

Where do the 20 percent of us who don't strongly identify with the ideological extremes go? Since neither is an incumbent, we can't say "ah, he's the devil I know." (As a voter could do in other left/right elections like 1964 or 1936.) We have to submit to this stark choice.

If it's going to be about who do I want to have a beer with, it's easy. I want to have a beer with all four of them. They're all charming in their ways. But which one to vote for? Neither ticket seems to even want my vote.

They should take this special needs thing and run with it. They have a legitimate basis to support it with Cindy McCain's work and Trig Palin. That's compassionate conservatism, and I'd love to see the Obama campaign try to paint that position as cynical.

"Obama advisers and surrogates have also linked Palin to conservative former presidential candidate Pat Buchanan. An Associated Press story from Alaska, dated July 17, 1999, states that Palin, then the mayor of the small town of Wasilla, was wearing a Buchanan button during a Buchanan visit to Alaska.

The Miami Herald this week quoted an e-mail from Obama Florida spokesman Mark Bubriski that stated: "Palin was a supporter of Pat Buchanan, a right-winger or as many Jews call him: a Nazi sympathizer.""

1. the fake pregnancy2. membership in a radical secessionist party3. the claim that she can't be president because of her kids4. the claim about the affair5. the claim that she is too inexperienced6. the shocking claim that she did not write her own speech.

Remember all that stuff, and more? Just forget it. Move along. Nothing to see here. No bias.

We do need to hear about the economy. It's one thing to push it to the side, but ignoring it provides ammo for Obama and Biden. Flesh out plans to keep taxes low, to make competition more of a factor in health care, education, etc. We need to hear SOMETHING.

Why is it unconstitutional to name the cabinet prior to the election?Strikes me as a perfectly reasonable First Amendment thing to do.Furthermore, as the candidates seek to advertise their campaign and communicate direction, it strikes me that they'll begin to share their initial slates.

I am still not too keen on John McCain the politician, but I love Cindy McCain's style and gentility -- I love how, unlike Michelle Obama (forgive me, I must say this), her gaze is always gracious and welcoming, rather than looking angry all the time.

What makes the Palin situation so different from the Hillary one, is that Cindy McCain is so effusively generous to her. She looks in utter admiration at Sarah Palin, and that speaks beautifully about her character.

1. the fake pregnancyThat rumor emanated from Alaska and spread through the net, left, right and media. Ann Althouse spread it. And a part of the rumor was true, that the girl was pregnant.

Republicans are the only ones still talking about this. Playing victim.

2. membership in a radical secessionist partyPeople asked questions based on reports from the party itself that she attended meetings. Turns out her husband was a member for years, but not her. This was all factually reported and the changed story from the AIP about her attendance was reported. That's fair.

3. the claim that she can't be president because of her kidsWHO SAID THAT?You guys keep repeating this but after repeated requests not one of you can produce a quote and a link.

4. the claim about the affairAffair? What affair? Who said that? Where do you come up with this?

5. the claim that she is too inexperiencedWhat? People can't hold opinions? If you think that's a slur, you're pretty thin-skinned for politics.

6. the shocking claim that she did not write her own speech.Oh, please. Toughen up a little bit. That's deep cry baby territory.

---------------1) You seem to be saying your candidate can't be criticized. You're wrong. As Americans, we have a right to criticize candidates, on experience, ability, and positions.

2) You do not back up these charges of unfair treatment and abuse. It's all vague charges and this well-nurtured sense of victimhood.

Drill Sgt: Hiram Stevens Maxim was an all-American inventor. He emigrated to England because the competition here was too great. His son Hiram Percy, a pioneer radio amateur, founded the American Radio Relay League

Is this crap ever going to end? Get on with it already. I'm a big Republican supporter but as good as last night was this night sucks. How many times are they going to repeat the same story? I get it already. Enough! Please. I'm about to turn the TV off.

Those stories that contained falsehoods about her family didn't write themselves.

You've heard, I trust, of opposition research? "Oppo?" All campaigns spend a lot on it. It's the basis of negative campaigns.

Do they announce their findings in a press release? They do not. Slime about a candidate would not have the same impact if their opposition said it; in fact it would be counterproductive. No, what campaigns do is give their dirt to the media, preferably big media like the New York Times.

When they leak this stuff, do the reporters have the discretion to stand aside and say, "I'll not lower myself to this." Not really. Their access is at stake. This kind of stuff is not dumped on reporters' desks with an oh-by-the-way. They choose reporters carefully, based on who either agrees with their agenda or can be manipulated.

So while it will take a few years to find the culprits by name -- probably not til they write books bragging about it -- it is disingenuous to pretend they don't exist.

Boy, I want whoever put together the Cindy McCain video to do mine. While speaking of her father, he completely skipped over his first two wives and his Federal felony conviction. Similarly, he skipped over John's first wife. Describing Cindy's charity, he omitted when she stole drugs from it to feed her addiction.

I thought Republicans liked to hear "The Rrrrrest of the Story"?

But Cindy is the first speaker at this convention not to seem predominantly mean-spirited and self-centered. I give her credit.

" Boy, I want whoever put together the Cindy McCain video to do mine. While speaking of her father, he completely skipped over his first two wives and his Federal felony conviction. Similarly, he skipped over John's first wife. Describing Cindy's charity, he omitted when she stole drugs from it to feed her addiction."

I know. I mean, I thought Barack Obama went to Harvard. But all his academic accomplishments were mysteriously absent...and that 20 years of that Wright guy...

Describing Cindy's charity, he omitted when she stole drugs from it to feed her addiction.

And the Democratic convention totally failed to focus on Obama's days as a coke-snorting pothead or Biden's numerous ethics and plagiarism scandals. Why, its almost as if they were trying to present these people in the best possible light or something.

But Cindy is the first speaker at this convention not to seem predominantly mean-spirited and self-centered. I give her credit.

What a disgusting thing to say.

If anyone here had mentioned that the video of Barack Obama didn't mention his cocaine usage and the fact that he hung around with low-lifes half his life, there are many Republicans here who would've balked and chastised that person.

What petty people so many Democrats are. And people see right through that, and reject it.

Garry Owen, drill--I still like the M1; no experience with the Barrett but any rifle that fires a 50 cal has to be pretty good--still remember the serial number of my basic training m1: 1234294MSG Marcum, peace be upon him, taught me well.

thanks for walking FLS thru the intricacies of moving heavy divisions to remote places on the globe. you were kinder than I was.

The "corruption" theme kind of reminds me of when Dukakis said the election was about competence not ideology. He's saying it's about clean politics, not Republicanism. Everyone knows why, but it doesn't sell.

(ducks again)

He has to convince me that in the next four years, these Republicans will do better than those Republicans. He needs to talk about why Republican ideas can still work.

"McCain claims he knew about the pregnancy, and was not at all concerned. Why not? Not only do we have a woman with five children, including an infant with special needs, but a woman whose 17-year-old child will need her even more in the coming months. Not to mention the grandchild. This would inevitably be an enormous distraction for a new vice president (or president) in a time of global turmoil. Not only in terms of her job, but from a media standpoint as well."

"We let Washington change us" - key line, he had to do it and the convention is not responding well but *this* is why McCain was the right nominee and this is why he is the only possible Republican who could win this year.

"We let Washington change us" - key line, he had to do it and the convention is not responding well but *this* is why McCain was the right nominee and this is why he is the only possible Republican who could win this year."

Absolutely. Our party messed up. We need to own up to it and tell America how we'll fix it.

"Education is the civil rights issue of this century" - great line, key issue. I like him going in this direction. I hope he ties schools to the economy, the philosophy of which he articulated earlier.

He is being disingenuous in asking the question. This is a taunting game to him, not a true question.

He will parse every statement down to the dot over the "i". It's a game to him, and he has no intention of being open to proof. If Sally Quinn called him and said that she, a card-carrying member of the MSM, was responsible for attacking Sarah Palin, does anyone here believe that AlphaLibral would admit he's wrong?

Get the point? He's the equivalent of the Democrat protestors at the Convention: He's afraid to to let you think for yourself.